memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Qo'noS
This article says Qo'noS is 4 days from Sol at warp 5. This is based on Archer stating exactly that in ENT. But that makes Qo'noS like 2 light-years away. That's completely inconsistent. There aren't even any other stars that close to Sol. ----------- In which episode of which series or which movie is mentioned that the Klingon homeworld is located in the beta quadrant? -- TheQz 23:44, 7 Mar 2005 (GMT) * Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, the Star Trek Encyclopedia and common knowledge. --Gvsualan 23:56, 7 Mar 2005 (GMT) :*thank you, i didnt know even though i mustve seen that movie a million times..! -- TheQz 15:40, 8 Mar 2005 (GMT) ---- Where did the Klingons go after Qo'nos became unihabitable? :Perhaps Kronos became uninhabitable, and they went to Qo'noS... Or they found a way together with the Federation to restore their atmosphere or something. Ottens 10:29, 30 Jun 2004 (CEST) ::References please. -- Redge 11:53, 30 Jun 2004 (CEST) :::No, that's just a guess. ;) Ottens 12:46, 30 Jun 2004 (CEST) ::::No, I meant in the article. -- Redge 14:37, 30 Jun 2004 (CEST) Thanks. I just didn't understand this. ---- In Star Trek VI spells it Kronos (Caption), and TNG calls it Qo'noS wouldn't the different spelling suggest that they are different planets? BTW, how is it spelt in Enterprise? --TOSrules 02:59, Nov 16, 2004 (CET) :"Kronos" is an Anglicization of the more accurately spelled "Qo'noS". You see a lot with Klingon-- "p'tahk" vs. the more accurate "petaQ". Heck, "Klingon" itself is more accuaretly rended "tlhIngan". It's basically a "Peking" vs. "Beijing" situation. --Steve 03:59, 16 Nov 2004 (CET) Qo'noS-ian Geography? I've temporarily removed this passage until the information in it can be verified: ::--The surface of Qo'noS comprises a single supercontinent and a vast ocean. In addition, the planet has a severely tilted axis which causes wild seasonal changes, a turbulent atmosphere, and extremes of both warm and frigid weather.-- Where was this ever stated or shown? What is the source of this information? Was this written on some screen somewhere? We should remove it as Speculation or Non-Canon information if it hasn't. :The information comes from the script for TNG: "Sins of the Father". It includes at description of the planet. Since it wasn't stated in dialogue, I'll re-add the information as background. --From Andoria with Love 06:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC) ::Well, if it's in the script it does have some measure of credibility, I mean, we do have an Article for Picard's new 1st officer Martin Madden, and he's only in a deleted scene, by that rational, we must include Wesley Crusher on the Titan. It seems to be a gray area, which is sometimes good enough, I was concerned with the level of detail in the blurb and the lack of citation, which seemed to indicate it was either made-up by Random Joe or pulled from some RPG or something. In this case though, it seems good enough to be a regular part of the article, maybe under an apocrypha heading?--Foravalon 10 September 2006 (UTC) :Well, the article on Martin Madden and similar articles are those that will need to be discussed in the near future. The canon policy, as currently written, is pretty recent and we haven't gone through and sorted out those articles for deletion or what-not. By the current policy, articles can't contain information from deleted scenes or items from early draft script that were later removed. The exceptions to these are things which appeared on-screen (such as a planet, etc.) that weren't named in dialogue but did receive a name in the script or was given a name by production staff. In these instances, for article naming purposes, we can use that name (i.e. Neural, Livingston). But I digress... actually, worse than that, I've plum forgotten what I was talking about. Oh, well. Hope I answered your question, at least. Good night. :) --From Andoria with Love 10:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)